james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,802
- 170
I expected as much. Atheist science as dogma arguments. One can't exactly argue religion with an atheist.
Exactly. But I don't argue religion in itself. I am a man of faith and virtues. So I argue fanatical religions, that completely dismiss any other reality. That includes your 6000-yr-earther religion.
What you promote is pure belief in something that somebody made up, no matter what the consequences, and no matter what the evidence.
It is a very dangerous road to follow.
If the road or evolution vs creation is dangerous, then it is dangerous for all.
All I can reply to your opinions is truth is stranger than fiction. I compared evolution and evolutionary thinking -- Welcome to Evolution 101! -- to creation science and the Bible (started in 2000, but really got into it since 2012) and chose creation science as being more sound and accurate. It wasn't based on religious reasons. That said, I've found the Bible is the foundation of creation science so it cannot be left out. They should not use God in their arguments when it isn't a science matter. Creation science can be taught in public schools without the religion. They should not use God of the Gaps which is what Christians warned Christian scientists about, i.e. use God when science cannot explain something or when one is stuck and cannot find the answer.